LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1975, Page 76

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

76 THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

ot its Constitution. Resolutions of two successive conventions
of the Atlantic District have pointed out that when A Statement
of Scriptural and Confessional Principles was adopted by
majority vote at the 1973 synodical convention as a ‘more formal
and comprehensive statement of belief,” it was in effect added
to the Synod’s confessional standard in spite of assurances to
the contrary. (See Atlantic District 1974 special convention
Resolution 04-A and Atlantic District 1974 convention Resolution
3-5. Cf. also Resolutions 3-6 and 3-9.)

Accordingly the Atlantic District instructed its officers not
“to permit ‘A Statement’ to be used as a norm by which anyone
is to be judged’ ‘Atlantic District 1974 special convention
Resolution 04-A) and has requested the Synod at its 1975 con-
vention to rescind Resolution 3-01 of the Synod’s 1973 conven-
tion, “thereby withdrawing ‘A Statement of Scriptural and
Confessional Principles’ as ‘1) a doctrinal statement binding
upon the members of the Synod and (2) as a ‘more formal and
comprehensive statement of belief."’ (Atlantic District 1974
convention Resolutions 3-5 and 3-6)

Regrettably, in the time since the 1974 conventions of the
Atlantic District, it has become increasingly clear that A State-
ment has in effect been added to the Synod’s confessional
standard also by the actions of synodical officials. The test by
which one may determine whether the Synod’s confessional
standard has been enlarged to include A Statement is clearly
not to cite official documents of the Synod which give repeated
assurances that such is not the case (e. g., “Guiding Principles
for the Use of ‘A Statement. . .."" pp.5—6). Rather one must
ask whether congregations and agencies of the Synod are
permitted or even encouraged by officials of the Synod to judge
the doctrinal fitness of members of the Synod on the basis of
A Statement in addition to the Synod's confessional standard
when such members are being considered for calls and appoint-
ments.

That congregations and agencies of the Synod throughout
the Synod are making such judgments is a matter of common
knowledge. That officials of the Synod are permitting such
Judgments is made clear by the formal policy statement issued
by the Commission on Theology and Church Relations (‘Guiding
Principles.’ p. 7, sec. 5 d). Furthermore, the Board for Higher
Education in its ‘Policy Statement on the Limitation of Academic
Freedom" of April 1974, which is to be included in all contracts
of the Synod’s faculty members, has required that they must
conform their teaching to synodically adopted doctrinal state-
ments even if “they judge the synodically adopted doctrinal
statements to be out of harmony with the Scriptures and the
Confessions.”

Since the members of the Synod have been divided between
those who subscribe only to the Synod’s confessional standard
and those who subscribe as well to A Statement of Scriptural
and Contessional Principles. the Board of Directors of the
Atlantic District presents the following overture to the 1975
synodical convention of The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod.

WHEREAS, A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Prin-
ciples has been adopted by the Synod as a “more formal and
comprehensive statement of belief’ and in effect has been
added to the confessional standard of the Synod: therefore be it

Resolved. That the Synod in convention in Anaheim, if it
fails to withdraw A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional
Principles as a “more formal and comprehensive statement of
belief,” provide a process for the amicable division of the Synod
by which the Synod's assets, properties, and all such temporali-
ties may be equitably divided between those members of the
Synod who subscribe only to the Synod’s confessional standard
‘Constitution, Art. IT) and those who subscribe as well to A State-
ment of Scriptural and Confessional Principles.

Board of Directors
Atlantic District
Arlin A. Maas, Secretary

3-44

To Resist Splits or Schisms
WHEREAS. We are all united in our belief in Jesus Christ as
our Savior: and

WHEREAS. There is much talk about separation, schism, and
division of the Missouri Synod: and

WHEREAS. Any such division would reduce the effectiveness
of the Missouri Synod in its primary objective of bringing Christ
to the unchurched: and

WHEREAS. We are against and do not see the need for a split
in the Missouri Synod: therefore be it

Resolved. That the Missouri Synod in convention at Anaheim
conduct itself in a spirit and a manner conducive to peaceful
reconciliation in testimony to our faith in Christ and resist all
efforts at splits or schisms.

Zion Lutheran Church
Westwood, N. J.

Charles L. Maul Jr., President
B. Dianne Jordans, Secretary
Norman Brinkmann, Pastor

3-45A

To Repudiate Rival Seminary

WHEREAS. Article III of the Synod's Constitution states as a
first object of the Synod “the conservation and promotion of
the unity of the true faith (Eph. 4:3-6: 1 Cor. 1:10) and a united
defense against schism and sectarianism’ and as the third
object of the Synod “the training of ministers and teachers
for service in the Evangelical Lutheran Church”: and

WHEREAS, The third object must be carried out in the light
of and in keeping with the first object: and

WHEREAS, On Feb. 19, 1974, those professors and staff of
Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, whose contracts were termi-
nated for breach of contract began a project in theological
education variously called “Seminex" (Seminary-in-Exile)
and “Seminop” (Seminary in opposition) in rivalry to the two
Concordia Seminaries that are under properly elected Boards of
Control: and

WHEREAS, An organization calling itself ‘Evangelical Lu-
therans in Mission” (ELIM) has been aggressively raising money
for this rival seminary and has urged ministerial students to
attend it instead of the Synod’s official seminaries, thus diverting
money and students away from synodically adopted programs.
missions, and educational institutions: and

WHEREAS. The Synod's Commission on Constitutional Mat-
ters has pointed out that neither the rival seminary faculty
nor the Council of Presidents nor any other body has the
authority to certify seminary graduates for the ministry within
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, for this authority is
placed in the hands of the proper faculties of the two seminaries
of the Synod: and

WHEREAS, The Handbook of the Synod states in Bylaws 4.01
a and b that only such properly certified graduates may become
pastors within the Synod: and

WHEREAS. To allow unauthorized groups to organize their
own colleges and seminaries outside the doctrinal supervision
of elected boards of control would destroy the Synod and would
totally break down any type of doctrinal discipline whatsoever:
and

WHEREAS. The placing of such students as pastors or vicars
constitutes a schismatic action just as the very existence of a rival
seminary outside the doctrinal supervision of the Synod is a
schismatic action: and

WHEREAS. The board of directors of *“Seminex”™ called as its
president a man who has been found guilty of false doctrine by
the properly elected Board of Control! of Concordia Seminary,
St. Louis, which will ultimately require his removal from the
clergy roster of the Synod, thus deliberately bypassing, scorning,
and ignoring the processes of evangelical discipline within the
Synod; and

WHEREAS. The position identified as that of the majority of
the faculty of *‘Seminex’’ has been judged by the Synod in its
1973 convention as “in fact false doctrine running counter to the
Holy Scriptures, the Lutheran Confessions, and the synodical
stance and fer that reason ‘cannot be tolerated in the church
of God. much less excused and defended’ ”’ (1973 Proceedings.
3-09): and

WHEREAS. None of the present “Seminex” faculty has
repudiated the position condemned in the above-named Resolu-
tion 3-09: and